To many doctors, the idea of cutting down on resident work hours is blasphemy--but in July 2003, it happened anyway. Now, with the Institute of Medicine suggesting further cuts in maximum allowable resident work schedules, physician groups are up in arms again.
One such constituency is neurosurgeons, whose three main professional bodies idnvolved in teaching residents are predicting dire consequences if such scheduling cuts are made. They say the IOM recommendations, which would mandate a maximum 16-hour shift, could prove hazardous to patients. They're equally outraged by proposals made by other parties that would limit the resident work week to 56 hours (as in Great Britain).
In a survey appearing in the Journal of Neurosurgery, researchers reported that 96 percent of chief residents and residency program directors believed that the existing 80-hour work week had compromised training. Most also reported that such regulations negatively affected patient safety and access to quality care, partly due to problems with patient handoffs, a lack of continuity of care and training of neurosurgeons with less experience and training.
What's more, these regs could limit the abilit of hospitals to provide expertise in neurosurgical care in trauma situations, the groups suggest, as reduced work hours would limit the availability of such specialists.
To learn more about the neurologists' position:
- read this press release
Related Articles:
Beth Israel faces questions on surgical work hours
Study: Long hospital shifts boost mistakes
Studies: Resident shift limits don't lower mortality
Med school faculty fret over cutting resident hours